this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
59601 readers
2940 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'd only do that if you want independent news.
I'm not sure what you're saying here ...
Why would anyone sponsor an IDF propaganda outlet?
Pay for news if you want it to be independent, and not beholden to sponsors.
I'd go as far as to say that paying for news (if you have the means to do so comfortably), is your duty as a commitment to democracy.
Ahh, yes I agree on all points; thanks for the clarification!
It's amazing the number of times on Lemmy that someone will come in with the completely opposite "explanation" for what I was saying. Almost like they have an agenda.
It's so weird to turn my statement of "support the news with money" into "the mainstream media can't be trusted".
Maybe it's only happened twice, but it's still weird that it's happened twice.
Phrasing things in semi-sarcastic converse will do that
I was wondering if that's where you were going in part.
I think it's a bit of the phrasing; you stated an opinion that's vague to the point of tiptoeing towards the potentially loaded question: "who's independent media?"
It's not uncommon in the conservative media sphere to see a similar (typically series) of leading ambiguous questions. They're never genuine, it's always in the style of:
I think it's made a bunch of if antsy lol
He probably means one of these (or both):
New York Times is a huge corporation. The commenter would only support a site which is run by one creator, or with a genuine small team, which is transparent and not an asshole.
New York Times is biased politically or accepting bribery attempts from other corpos to make them look in a better light.
Yeah but good luck chasing multiple stories across the world as a small team.
Jesus Christ, no. It's almost like you're trying to sow distrust in the news and facts.
The NYT isn't perfect, but it's some of the most reliable news the world has.
Dear god I can't believe anyone still believes this shit after NYT hired an ex IDF soldier without any prior journalistic experience to write a massive fake rape propaganda article for israel.
NYT is a state propaganda outlet.
The New York Crimes is a garbage propaganda rag. They don't deserve a red cent from anyone after pushing their transphobic agenda, (and responding to widespread criticism by publishing an article defending JK Rowling) or after they blatantly lied and published a fake news story about Hamas conducting mass rape in an attempt to sway public opinion to be in favor of Israel's genocide. If you have a NYT subscription, you are paying people to lie to you.
Well it definitely seemed like that. Sorry I was just assuming, since most Lemmy people are really anti-establishment on everything basically.
Well, if you didn't get it from me, you certainly would have gotten it from some of these responses.
Well yeah. This comment section is wild, that's for sure.